smk4565

290 hp in a front drive car is a disaster waiting to happen, they'll be stuck around 260-268 like the Camry, Accord, MKZ, Taurus, etc. My guess would be the same 263 in the base CTS. But I am not convinced Buick will make that the entry level engine, they love cheap pushrods that make 200 hp. I don't think they need to out power the cars I just mentioned, but they should beat them in quietness/smoothness and fuel economy. Real wood trim is a must, Buick's fake wood is bad and always looks glued on. I have doubts whether Buick will do what they really need to do to make it nice, because I think GM knows people aren't going to spend $30,000 base for a Buick sedan and they are afraid of risk. That is why the LaCrosse and Lucerne sell so many units in the $22-28,000 price range. Same reason no Cadillac sedan has a base price over $47,000, they are afraid.

The new 2.9 liter engine is the way to go, it makes over 410 lb-ft of torque, that is nearly 140 more than the DI 3.6 engine. Of course they also need to make it clean, and 50 state emissions compliant. If it is 0-60 in under 6 seconds and making 30-35 mpg people will buy.

I am guessing it will be similar size and shape to the Malibu, different front and rear. The 08 Malibu looks great on the outside, it will be tough to make a Buick look better than that, and not look like a frumpy geezer mobile like their current lineup appears. I bet they put cloth bench, plastic wheel covers and a pushrod V6 in the base model so they can have a $22,900 MSRP, and sell them to Avis.

I hope GM doesn't cave in this time. They need to level the playing field with Toyota, let them strike all they want, they have a crazy amount of inventory anyway.

The GTC concept interior was really nice, I hope the Aura interior is close to the concept. The original Aura concept had a nice looking interior also, then they cheaped out on some places, like replacing the driver info display with just an airbag warning light. I see they might do that with not putting the navigation system in. The Accord offers a nav system, GM is going to have to make it an option on the Aura and Malibu. Epsilon has plenty of size, Aura is 190 inches long, 08 Malibu is 192, Camry and Accord are 191, Fusion is 190. 190 inches long seems to be the magic number for midsize cars.

Crossover sales are just replacing body on frame. SUVs on a whole are not a rapid growth market. If The CTS selling half of the 3-series is a success because the 3-series is a 15 year leader, then what is Lexus? Cadillac lead the US in luxury sales for 55 years in a row, Lexus started making cars 88 years after Cadillac started, and Lexus is selling about 150% as many units. That sickens me. I don't want to see Cadillac introduce 8 models just for the sake of having volume, total brand sales I don't worry so much about, but I'd like to see 5 products that are world class and sell worldwide.

I think the CTS is a little big for a coupe or convertible, although they chose that size, they chose sedan only, they chose rear drive only in 2003. So it is their own fault that the 3-series has so many variations and the CTS doesn't. It is like Nissan saying that the Titan can't compete because they have 1 engine choice and the Silverado has 5. No Cadillac sold 70,000 units in 2006 or will achieve that in 2007, I doubt an entry level SUV will come in and be the #1 selling Cadillac. Cadillac's image has improved but not nearly enough. The CTS gray plastic is a lot like the Lincoln MKZ's center console. That's fine if you want you want to sell $33,000 vehicles, but I thought Cadillac was aspiring to more than that. GM always relies on SUVs, which is a crowded and shrinking market, they can't just launch a new SUV and think Saab or Cadillac will be fine, they need cars that people want and never have a $5000 off tag on them.

The 3-series outsells the CTS more than 2-1 in the CTS's home market, worldwide is is more like 7 to 1, so I wouldn't say the CTS is successful in getting BMW buyers. The CTS interior could easily be better, I sat in one the other day at the dealership, there is a ton of plastic in there. Anything gray is not metal, it is plastic, the shifter was also plastic, and I sat in 2 different models each with an MSRP over $46,000. The interior is better than many cars, but not the best, and the car's performance is class average. The SRX doesn't sell because it looks like a wagon and had a bad interior at first. The SRX can also get pricey, and Cadillac's image is not strong enough to drop money on one when they can get a BMW or Mercedes, which gives much higher social status amongst the country club types. I just tried to talk someone looking for a used SUV into an SRX, and she liked the vehicle, but didn't like Cadillac's image and worried about reliability of an American car, and bought an older, much higher mileage Lexus instead because she trusted it to last longer. Image is everything with luxury cars. I fully expect the BRX to be better than the 9-4x, and they'll probably sell 40,000 a year because it will be cheap, but that still doesn't fix the image problem. Small SUVs do have a mommy-mobile appeal to them, and women generally don't like Cadillacs that much because they have made land barges and grandpa cars for 20 years and still do with the DTS. Could be tough to get 20 year import buying women to out of the blue go look at a Cadillac, unless the product is ridiculously good, and their image is strong.

The RX does sell better because of the image of Lexus, which stems from their flagship. They have a reputation for long lasting, nothing breaks, and high resale value. Just look at what 5 year old Lexus or BMWs go for compared to a Deville or Seville. The MDX sold well because Honda has the same reputation of lasting forever and high resale value, the Accord and Civic have that too. And the MDX won several magazine comparos and awards over the years. I fear the BRX is Cadillac's version of the Lincoln MKX, they are taking a big shortcut basing it of Chevy that isn't even a good vehicle. I think it will look good on the outside, if the interior is better than the CTS it should look good on the inside, but driving dynamics will lack, and the GM bean counters will penny pinch somewhere. Cadillac's aren't sought after status symbols like Mercedes or BMW, they need more high end, less Chevy hand me downs. I am aware of the BMW 1-series and Mercedes A and B class, the Euro market requires tiny cars like that, but those cars don't lack fit and finish, and Mercedes has $150,000 SL and S class cars and the SLR McClaren in the showroom, so their overall image is high. Plus the E-class is a huge seller for them, about 250k a year, 3-series sells over 500k a year, so they aren't totally relying on low end cars for sales. Lexus has a 6 year, 70,000 mile powertrain warranty. Hyundai has 10/100k powertain even. That won't make me buy one, but GM's warranty is nothing special. I like having a good warranty, but it isn't making me pick one brand over the other. I would however like to see Cadillac increase the bumper to bumper warranty to try to convince people that their cars are reliable and long lasting. What I see with Cadillac is renaissance 1 didn't work, sales are declining, BMW and Lexus are up every month. They can't do the next 5 years the same as the last 5, they need something new.

Saab has lost money 15 of the 17 years GM has had half or full ownership (since 1990). They sold 130,00 units worldwide last year, and lowered their forecast for this year and next. Mercedes and BMW each sell over 1 million units per year, why do Cadillac and Saab combine to sell 400,000 or so, that is pathetic. If they didn't dilute their money into so many brands and cars, and had 6 world class Cadillacs, they would sell more, and make more. The BRX, just like the CTS should have the 3.6 DI engine STANDARD. They are Cadillac, they should not have weaker engines than CamCords, Infiniti has a 306-330 hp V6 standard. The only reason to not have a 300+ hp engine standard is if it is a diesel or a small V6 plus hybrid that is 250 horsepower, but averages well over 30 mpg. Having high mileage vehicles could be key for them in getting conquest sales from the turbo-4 and diesel Euro cars, plus if they want to sell a car in Europe they need high mileage engines anyway. The BRX better be good too, the Mercedes M-class hybrid has 340 hp and gets 32 mpg average. I realize the M-class is a different price/class, but the RX400h gets 30 mpg as well, the competition is getting fierce. I want to see Cadillac on top, but their future product plan doesn't have enough bullets in it, they once again are bringing a knife to a gun fight like they did with the 05 STS. Upping the warranty to 5/60,000 bumper to bumper would be a good idea too.

Lexus's reputation and image is far superior to Cadillac's. They have some high end products like the LS460 that convey status, Cadillac doesn't have that. Cadillac is supposed to be performance-luxury, not mommy mobiles, even the X3 and X5 are longitudinal engines and more performance based. Cadillac could make a Malibu with a nice interior and sell a ton too, but that won't make them the high status brand they want to be.

Any Saab product is a waste of money at this point, especially this one. They lose money every year, their sales shrink every year, but GM figures they better keep spending money on a car no one wants, while ignoring segments like minivans or a 40 mpg car. The Cadillac BRX is a horrible idea as well, front drive, transversely mounted engines need to be banned from Cadillac, as well as any transmission that isn't 6 gears or more. Cadillac can't build credibility with a dressed up Equinox, a 90s platform DTS, '04 9-3 wagon rebadge BLS, and a corvette rebadge XLR that is slow, not that luxurious and costs $80,000. The CTS is their only good car, aside from the soon to be cancelled SRX, which is the most awarded vehicle they built in 15-20 years. The BRX is basically like saying we give up, we'll compete with Lincoln and make MKZ and MKX type cars.

Agreed. Look at a 97-2000 Buick used and see what condition the paint is in. They do well in 3 year reliability, but not 10 year. Buick says will keep dropping, they serve a purpose for a few more years while their core buyers are alive, but after that they are useless. Obviously Saab should die first in the fewer, but better models plan, but Buick (like Mercury) is on death watch. When they redo the Impala it should be nicer than the Lucerne or Chrysler 300, the Malibu LTZ could have a better interior too. In hindsight, Oldsmobile was really a blend of what they have been trying to make Buick, Saturn and Pontiac. Olds had some luxury, some performance, and some import fighter ability. Maybe they should have kept them and pumped a lot of money in 1 brand, rather than a little money into 3 brands and dilute resources. Would have given them a better Chevy-Olds-Cadillac hierarchy. Might have failed, but could have worked.

Funny stuff, and I totally agree. This and the Cimarron are neck and neck for worst Cadillac ever. This car is just hurting their image more so in Europe. Cadillac needs to realize they need a real small car for Europe, the CTS is too big and they can't just rebadge anything, they need a unique product.

I never drove a CTS-V, only the V6 version. I hope to drive the 08 cts tomorrow. I know several people with GM pushrods, I used to own one, I have never experienced a GM pushrod as good as a DOHC V8 engine. Cadillac is the only luxury brand that uses a pushrod engine aside from the Bentley Arnage. If the pushrod was so good, Lexus, BMW and Mercedes would use it. They know what sells in the luxury segment, GM doesn't (unless it is a truck), and GM gives Cadillac parts bin stuff from Chevy and expects that to compete with BMW, it doesn't work. Luxury marques really rely on image to sell a car, the companies with the best image sell the most, it is hard to make an image with a Chevy pushrod when the other brand has twin turbo 6, 8 and 10 cylinder engines and a V12 in the showroom.

They are near dead, sales are down this year, they have been down 20% of more several months in a row. The Enclave gets outsold by 40 or so other SUVs If they made a really good Malibu and Impala there would be less need for Buick. The 08 Malibu exterior is one of the best looking cars I think, I wish the interior were better though. Buick won't ever appeal to young people, they are the car of the baby-boomer's parents. I know there is a market for a soft-quiet near luxury car, but there are cars that fit that market much better than the dated Buicks. If Buick made a class leader, I'd say they are worth keeping, but they don't.

I think this car is embarrassing. The wreath and crest should never be on a piece of junk like that, they might as well put one on front of the new Malibu. The wood trim around the shifter looks glued on, almost like the G6's fake wood does. The exterior is ugly, and the Saab 9-3 isn't even that great of a car, putting a Cadillac badge on a lesser car is not going to get them established in Europe. Cadillac never made a wagon in 100 years, there is a reason, wagons are not cool. I know they are searching for sales, but the Escalade pickup and a 9-3 wagon badge job aren't the way to get them. Anything with a wreath and crest on it should be a standard of the world level car.

The IS, M3, RS4 are also much smaller than the CTS, they don't need as much power to move. A friend of mine has a Corvette, it is pretty loud, especially the exhaust. Sports cars are generally loud though, so it doesn't matter, luxury cars are quiet and smooth. Cadillac at some point has to make a small car, and make the CTS-sized car their middle car and price it with other middle cars. They can't leave the 5-series/E-class market vacant forever, and when they move in to it, they can't have a pushrod. Really it doesn't matter to me what they do with the CTS-V, I doubt I'd ever buy one anyway, I'd take a DOHC V8 making 370 hp over a 500-600 pushrod any day, and I'd pay $2000 extra for the DOHC with less power.

Pushrods have too many disadvantages, like needing huge displacement to make power, harshness, vibration, noise. They can't get away with that on a luxury car. Notice they couldn't get away with it on a Malibu, it won't work on a Cadillac. Lexus is doing a V10, Audi has a turbo V10, BMW is working on a turbo V10, the level of technology in those engines is really high, people will pay the premium for high tech stuff, the pushrod offers nothing special to buyers like that.

Looks like an Outlook but worse, for some reason the Chevy grille isn't working on this vehicle, kind of like how the Olds Aurora/Alero style front looked bad on the Bravada. GM has just repeated the 4 minivans mistake. Their small to midsize SUV lineup is really weak now, the over weight Vue is really all they have until the update the Equinox.

A 335xi with sport package, cold weather package, keyless access ($500), premium package, automatic ($1375), satellite radio and rear parking sensors is $48,700. Take off $2000 if you don't need all wheel drive. The 2 items in parenthasis Saab doesn't have. It is pricey, but not $55,000, plus it's 0-60 time is the same as an Aston Martin DB9. Or compare this car to a CTS, the CTS has a far better interior for the same money. The CTS probably handles better than the Saab too, despite being bigger and heavier, because Sigma is a far better platform than Epsilon. No car with a transversely mounted engine handles great, they may be good, but never class leading.

Agreed, the 335i is pretty good. This looks like they gave the 9-3 a dose of Pontiac, big exhaust tips, spoiler, some ground effects, add 30 hp (still 25 short of the competition) and call it a performance car. They need to sell or close Saab, give every dime of theirs to Cadillac.

Metal grille looks better than the plastic. Otherwise the car looks bad, horrible interior. GM doesn't realize that the 3.6 liter high feature engine is average, the Japanese have had engines that make more power and get better mileage in their midsize sedans for a few years now. Pontiac should become the fleet sale brand, so they can end fleet sales on all the other brands (aside from commercial use full size vans/pickups). Pontiacs are basically Chevys with lower quality materials and plastic cladding inside and out. Either GM is really stupid, or really poor and can't fund this brand. Either way, why keep this brand around? All they are good for is rental cars, and I don't know if that is even a good idea, because it will give GM products a poor reputation. The G8 is going to be a bust also, because no one will pay over 30k for a Pontiac, it is like paying 30k for a Mitsubishi or Kia. The G8 V6 also has less power than a Camry, Accord or Altima, but weighs nearly 400 pounds more, how sporty can it be?

ZR1 is a good name choice. I am glad they went with that, using SS badging would have looked tacky. ZR1 is more legendary too.

I am actually 26, and never owned anything but a GM car. I want to see GM make better products, so this 20 year decline they are on ends. If you sit in a 335i, the interior is pretty nice, I don't like BMW's styling, but the materials are high level. Where as I like the design and layout of the STS, but the plastics are bad, there are gaps, etc. The 5-series and E-class offer a V8, that makes up for their 3900 pound weights. The CTS is going to be compared to the 3-series, IS and G, and the weight will hurt it in handling and gas mileage. Luckily the Lexus IS is a gas hog too, but Cadillac could really benefit from the 30 mpg car, whether it be a hybrid (good for CTS) or small turbo direct injection engine (this would be good for the BTS). As far as size, I personally like 190 inch long cars, that is a popular size (Camry, Accord, Malibu, CTS, etc). But for people without kids that dirve alone 95% of the time, I see the appeal of a smaller car that is sportier and more fuel efficient like the 3-series. Cadillac has to get their lineup straightened out, then they can morph this CTS into a great car. Personally I'd call the Alpha car the CTS, and the Sigma car STS, because CTS is known as entry level.